- From: Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 23:14:42 -0700
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
> We encourage the growth of alternatives to the open web, and the open web > risks becoming relegated to mostly low-value content. Hmmm. Low-value content is another term - like "premium content" - that assumes a whole bunch of values up-front. > So I am not sure I understand. This sounds like "since I would not want > to watch it, and cannot watch it because of my principles, I don't think > anyone should"? I doubt that's right, but what is? No, that's not right at all. Personally, I'm okay with DRM - in some circumstances, I think it makes sense for both parties. I happen to think it makes no sense whatsoever for mass-market entertainment media, but that's just my opinion. Clearly many others differ. What I meant was: a link to content that is not accessible by the Open Web is essentially meaningless in that context. It's perfectly reasonable for people with compatible DRM stacks to share resources by sharing URLs, but that hardly counts as the Open Web. In fact, it's the antithesis of it. -- Duncan Bayne ph: +61 420817082 | web: http://duncan-bayne.github.com/ | skype: duncan_bayne I usually check my mail every 24 - 48 hours. If there's something urgent going on, please send me an SMS or call me at the above number.
Received on Sunday, 7 July 2013 06:15:05 UTC